| Literature DB >> 29084281 |
Yancang Li1, Jing Yang1, Huawang Shi1, Yijie Li1.
Abstract
To find a more effective method for the assessment of sustainable urban transport development, the comprehensive assessment model of sustainable urban transport development was established based on the unascertained measure. On the basis of considering the factors influencing urban transport development, the comprehensive assessment indexes were selected, including urban economical development, transport demand, environment quality and energy consumption, and the assessment system of sustainable urban transport development was proposed. In view of different influencing factors of urban transport development, the index weight was calculated through the entropy weight coefficient method. Qualitative and quantitative analyses were conducted according to the actual condition. Then, the grade was obtained by using the credible degree recognition criterion from which the urban transport development level can be determined. Finally, a comprehensive assessment method for urban transport development was introduced. The application practice showed that the method can be used reasonably and effectively for the comprehensive assessment of urban transport development.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29084281 PMCID: PMC5662088 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186893
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Assessment system for the sustainable development of urban transport.
| Target layer A | State layer B | Index layer C |
|---|---|---|
| Urban transport sustainable development A | Economic development B1 | Per capita GDP C1 |
| Growth rate of GDP (%) C2 | ||
| Urban transport infrastructure investment proportion (%) C3 | ||
| Urban transport management facilities investment proportion (%) C4 | ||
| Transport demand B2 | Road area ratio (%) C5 | |
| Per capita road area (square metre) C6 | ||
| Urban road network density (km/sq km) C7 | ||
| Main road density (km/sq km) C8 | ||
| Urban environment quality B3 | Motor vehicle tail gas passing rate (%) C9 | |
| Air pollution saturation of a road transport (%) C10 | ||
| Over standard rate of section air quality (%) C11 | ||
| Annual average of main road noise (db) C12 | ||
| Resource consumption of urban transport B4 | Consumption proportion of urban transport land (%) C13 | |
| Resource consumption index of urban transport (%) C14 |
Grading standard for the sustainable development of urban transport.
| Assessment index | Grade divide | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ⅴ | Ⅳ | Ⅲ | Ⅱ | Ⅰ | ||
| B1 | C1 | <0.7 | 0.7–3 | 3–6 | 6–15 | ≥15 |
| C2 | <3 | 3–5 | 5–8 | 8–10 | ≥10 | |
| C3 | <1.5 | 1.5–2 | 2–2.5 | 2.5–3 | ≥3 | |
| C4 | <1.5 | 1.5–2 | 2–2.5 | 2.5–3 | ≥3 | |
| B2≥ | C5 | <7 | 7–9 | 9–11 | 11–13 | ≥13 |
| C6 | <4 | 4–6 | 6–8 | 8–11 | ≥11 | |
| C7 | 1–4 | 4–5 | 5–6 | 6–7 | ≥7 | |
| C8 | 1–2.5 | 2.5–3 | 3–3.5 | 3.5–4 | ≥4 | |
| B3 | C9 | <80 | 80–85 | 85–90 | 90–95 | ≥95 |
| C10 | >0.9 | 0.75–0.9 | 0.6–0.75 | 0.4–0.6 | <0.4 | |
| C11 | >30 | 20–30 | 15–20 | 10–15 | <10 | |
| C12 | >75 | 70–75 | 65–70 | 60–65 | <60 | |
| B4 | C13 | >6 | 4.5–6 | 3–4.5 | 2–3 | <2 |
| C14 | >0.8 | 0.6–0.8 | 0.4–0.6 | 0.2–0.4 | <0.2 | |
The index value for the sustainable development of urban transport.
| Index | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | 0.6 | 0.62 | 0.68 | 0.74 | 0.84 | 0.86 |
| C2 | 14.5 | 9.1 | 10.2 | 10.3 | 8.1 | 7.7 |
| C3 | 0.12 | 0.13 | 0.09 | 0.072 | 0.8 | 0.75 |
| C4 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.1 | 0.92 | 0.8 | 0.82 |
| C5 | 8.2 | 8.0 | 7.82 | 7.85 | 8.0 | 7.88 |
| C6 | 4.60 | 5.62 | 5.73 | 8.45 | 8.6 | 8.8 |
| C7 | 5.2 | 4.94 | 4.83 | 5.6 | 5.8 | 6.2 |
| C8 | 1.2 | 1.42 | 1.6 | 1.54 | 2.1 | 2.3 |
| C9 | 86.2 | 87.3 | 88 | 88 | 88.2 | 88.4 |
| C10 | 1.42 | 1.34 | 1.28 | 1.26 | 1.0 | 0.98 |
| C11 | 34 | 32 | 30 | 29 | 31 | 28 |
| C12 | 66.4 | 67 | 68.3 | 69.1 | 69.4 | 69.6 |
| C13 | 3.4 | 4.2 | 3.22 | 4.8 | 5.4 | 6.2 |
| C14 | 0.8 | 0.82 | 0.75 | 0.74 | 0.65 | 0.56 |
The result of the comprehensive assessment.
| Year | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Development score | 3.892 | 4.265 | 4.049 | 3.993 | 4.106 | 4.075 |
| Development grade | Ⅱ | Ⅱ | Ⅱ | Ⅲ | Ⅲ | Ⅲ |